Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-2650.Sokol et al.09-10-16 Decision Commission de Commission de Crown Employeess Grievance Settlement Grievance Settlement règlement des griefs règlement des griefs BoardBoard des employés de la des employés de la Couronne Couronne Suite 600 Suite 600 Bureau 600 Bureau 600 180 Dundas St. West 180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Fax (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 GSB#2006-2650 GSB#2006-2650 UNION#2006-0229-0017UNION#2006-0229-0017 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UUnnddeerr THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTHE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT TIVE BARGAINING ACT BBeeffoorree THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEENBETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union èÏÔÎÏ (Sokol et al) - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer BEFOREVice-Chair Felicity D. Briggs FOR THE UNION Laura Josephson Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYERBrian Scott Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Staff Relations Officer HEARINGOctober 8, 2009. DECISION [1]The Employer and the Union at the Ontario Correctional Institute agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol. Most of the grievances were settled through that process. However, a few remained unresolved and therefore require a decision from this Board. The Protocol provides that decisions will be issued within a relatively short period of time after the actual mediation sessions and will be without reasons. Further, the decision is to be without prejudice and precedent. [2]A group grievance was filed on behalf of a number of Correctional Officers. These officers were rolled over in accordance with an agreement between the parties. The grievors allege that they are entitled to a variety of benefits because the Employer allowed too much time to pass between the decision to roll over these officers and the actual roll over date. [3]Facts virtually identical to those set out by the Union in this case have been argued before this Board and rejected in the past. For reasons stated in an earlier decision (GSB #2003-3817 issued on November 23, 2006 and GSB#2006-0604 issued on June 10, 2009) I am denying this grievance. th Dated at Toronto this 16 day of October 2009. Felicity D. Briggs, Vice-Chair